RNC Raises Money Off The Times Story, But Doesn't Mention McCain

Kind of weird:

Here's the text of an RNC e-mail solicitation. It excoriates the lib-ber-al media for trying to "do whatever it takes to put Senator Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama in the White House." Sins are unspecified, but the context is clear.

Dear Friend,

The New York Times has proven once again that the liberal mainstream media will do whatever it takes to put Senator Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama in the White House.

From the beginning of Campaign 2008, liberal media pundits have fawned over the Democrat presidential candidates while ignoring their lack of substance on the issues. You can be certain that as the campaign heats up they will continue to mislead voters with their anti-Republican agenda.

Republicans must fight back against the mainstream media's clear liberal bias -- and we need your help to do it.

Please make an urgent secure online contribution of $1,000, $500, $100, $50, or $25 to help the RNC get our responsible message of lower taxes, a strong national defense, and limited government past the liberal media filter and directly to the voters.

Thank you in advance for your support.

Best Wishes,

Robert M. "Mike" Duncan
Chairman, Republican National Committee

Comments

blah...

how soon they forget that it was the NYT who helped sell the war in IRaq...Hardly a "liberal media filter" in that case.

And how come the DNC doesnt raise money off of Fox "News"?

Posted by jb | February 21, 2008 3:28 PM

Marc, just out of curiosity, what's with your sudden infatuation with the term "lib-ber-al"? I've seen "lie-beral" (and variants) used nonironically, and "libruh" usually used ironically, but I'm not familiar with "lib-ber-al." What's it supposed to mean?

Posted by Jeff Larson | February 21, 2008 3:31 PM

What's so funny about this is that, had the NY times published this story a month and a half ago, when all the Republican pundits were crying out in favor of Romney and regularly bashing McCain, you can easily imagine Rush, Ingraham, Hannity, etc. using the article as a way of steamrolling Romney in to the nomination. They'd probably SUPPORT the NY times "smear" of McCain--HAD it occurred several weeks earlier. I myself wish this was the case. A Romney nomination would have ensured Republican defeat; a McCain nomination makes that less certain.

Posted by wj | February 21, 2008 3:50 PM

Hello, Marc, commenters-

Per the question posed by Jeff Larson:

There was a spoof made by a GOP candidate (I can't remember who) in the 1990s, with three Budweiser speaking-frogs ads ("Bud - Weis - Er"), with the name being replaced by the Democratic candidate (unfortunately, the name of whom I also do not recall), with "Lib-Er-Al" as the spoken syllables by the frogs... I speculate that this commercial is what Marc might be referring to...

Posted by ElectionNightHQ.com (McCain site) Publisher | February 21, 2008 4:02 PM

Follow-up to the previous post-

I tried to find the ad, which probably ran during the 1996 cycle (the Budweiser Frogs debuted during the previous year's Super Bowl). Although I never found it, another individual, who also remembered the mid-'90s frogs, decided to take the same principle and apply it to Fred:

http://campaignads.org/video.php?videoid=221

Very cool site, above, which I found during the search and which has the Frogs saying "Fred--Thomp--son."

Posted by ElectionNightHQ.com (McCain site) Publisher | February 21, 2008 4:15 PM